2019-2020 Silverado / Sierra 1500 Cold Air Intake by Roto-fab

[brendon444]

5 hours ago, OnTheReel said:

 

 

The other good news is, it was easy to put in, I have no CEL and it looks pretty cool. I will do some performance testing with my meter after it has had time to learn and after the rain goes away. I have about 10 baseline 0-60 runs so if I can match weather conditions, I should be able to check with some accuracy...if it helps, hurts or stays the same. Guessing it won’t make much difference but never know. 

 

 

Very interested to see how the performance testing goes! 

[OnTheReel]

On 10/5/2019 at 10:16 PM, brendon444 said:

 

 

Very interested to see how the performance testing goes! 

Okay, so here’s where we are at. I’ve tried very hard to match conditions, but unfortunately even in the heat of the day, my comparison runs were done in 68 degree weather versus 70 degrees for my “before” runs. I would have to say “close enough“ as the impact air temperature has on horsepower is only about 1% for every 10 degrees change. There is also always going to be slight pressure and humidity differences between tests, but I think this is as close as possible to scientific and certainly better than “well it feels faster!”

 

Best 6 runs “before intake”, only mod was the GM performance catback: Top 0-60 run was 5.71, average across the top 6 in this config was 5.76.

 

After intake, and about 150 miles learning by the time of testing...best was 5.46! And average across 6 runs was 5.57, almost 2 tenths quicker than “before”.

 

The 5.46 0-60 seemed like a freak of nature, I’ve never had it hook up and pull so hard from a stop. It was a legitimate run (not down hill, no funny business), but I couldn’t match it again and probably never will.

 

All testing was done in auto 4x4, just mashing the gas from a stop. Measured with a Dragy performance meter which has been proven to be very accurate. And as you can see, very consistent here in the records.

 

 

Taking a closer look at an “average“ run before (5.75s), and an “average“ run after (5.57s ran this exact time twice) probably gives the best picture of the real difference. I would say one could expect to consistently drop a tenth to 60, and two tenths not out of the question.

 

 

I had a lot of fun doing this test and didn’t really know what to expect. I would have been happy with anything but a loss, so the small improvement was just fine for me. Of course I’m left pounding my head on what could be if these things were tunable.

[brendon444]

Awesome information. 

 

Anyone have any rule of thumb for losing 2 tenths with a 5500lbs truck to hp comparisons. 

Ex. 15 whp result in 1 tenth. 

 

Either way awesome gains

[brendon444]

With the k2's people were saving tenths shifting from 4x4 back to 2wd after launch also. 

 

Read the new  ford limited and raptors run 5.2 0-60.   450hp/510ftlbs 

[OnTheReel]

38 minutes ago, brendon444 said:

With the k2's people were saving tenths shifting from 4x4 back to 2wd after launch also. 

 

Read the new  ford limited and raptors run 5.2 0-60.   450hp/510ftlbs 

Yeah, I’ve done some runs like that in the past (to no benefit) but not during these tests, I didn’t want to change the method from what I used before the Roto-Fab. For a 0-60 run, hitting 2WD makes little, if any difference because it’s pretty much over before the transfer case even shifts.

 

Couldn’t really find much on calculations for power increase on 0-60 times. Everything is for the 1/4 mile.

 

Car & Driver got 5.1 out of the Limited and 5.4 out of a HC 6.2. C&D’s numbers are always really really low and not necessarily reflective of real life from what I’ve seen. Not sure if they use some kind of correction factor or what. But with 3.42s, cat back and the intake, I only once *almost* matched their High Country which was on 3.23s and stock everything...

 

On the complete opposite end of the spectrum, Motor Trend got horrible times out of similar trucks...about 6 seconds for the Limited, 6.6 for an LTZ 6.2, and 6.9 for an AT4 6.2 with the performance package. Must have been a hot day because those numbers all seem nearly a second too high.

[Trailboss75]

22 hours ago, OnTheReel said:

Okay, so here’s where we are at. I’ve tried very hard to match conditions, but unfortunately even in the heat of the day, my comparison runs were done in 68 degree weather versus 70 degrees for my “before” runs. I would have to say “close enough“ as the impact air temperature has on horsepower is only about 1% for every 10 degrees change. There is also always going to be slight pressure and humidity differences between tests, but I think this is as close as possible to scientific and certainly better than “well it feels faster!”

 

Best 6 runs “before intake”, only mod was the GM performance catback: Top 0-60 run was 5.71, average across the top 6 in this config was 5.76.

 

After intake, and about 150 miles learning by the time of testing...best was 5.46! And average across 6 runs was 5.57, almost 2 tenths quicker than “before”.

 

The 5.46 0-60 seemed like a freak of nature, I’ve never had it hook up and pull so hard from a stop. It was a legitimate run (not down hill, no funny business), but I couldn’t match it again and probably never will.

 

All testing was done in auto 4x4, just mashing the gas from a stop. Measured with a Dragy performance meter which has been proven to be very accurate. And as you can see, very consistent here in the records.

 

 

Taking a closer look at an “average“ run before (5.75s), and an “average“ run after (5.57s ran this exact time twice) probably gives the best picture of the real difference. I would say one could expect to consistently drop a tenth to 60, and two tenths not out of the question.

 

 

I had a lot of fun doing this test and didn’t really know what to expect. I would have been happy with anything but a loss, so the small improvement was just fine for me. Of course I’m left pounding my head on what could be if these things were tunable.

awesome info, thans man!  I have mine, just havent had time to get it installed.  Hopefully in the next few days!

[rhamill1]

On 10/5/2019 at 5:20 PM, OnTheReel said:

 

Had a tight window before rain, but I managed to get it installed here this afternoon. Took about an hour, maybe a tiny bit more if you add in my OCD cleaning stuff, unboxing and memorizing the instructions.

 

Put about 35 miles on it so far in varying speeds/ conditions as a test, and trying to get it to relearn. Sound difference is good, not over the top but noticeable above 50% throttle. Nice roar at WOT. I have the loud GM catback so really not a huge difference to me. On a stock truck it would be more noticeable. When in DFM, it doesn’t have the super annoying “gulping” sound my Airraid MIT did on my 2016. So that’s good.

 

The other good news is, it was easy to put in, I have no CEL and it looks pretty cool. I will do some performance testing with my meter after it has had time to learn and after the rain goes away. I have about 10 baseline 0-60 runs so if I can match weather conditions, I should be able to check with some accuracy...if it helps, hurts or stays the same. Guessing it won’t make much difference but never know. 

Have you seen any improvements with MPG?

[OnTheReel]

3 hours ago, rhamill1 said:

Have you seen any improvements with MPG?

Not really, at least not in city driving. Once I take some longer trips I’ll be able to make better comparisons.

[Roto-fab]

On 10/7/2019 at 2:16 PM, OnTheReel said:

Okay, so here’s where we are at. I’ve tried very hard to match conditions, but unfortunately even in the heat of the day, my comparison runs were done in 68 degree weather versus 70 degrees for my “before” runs. I would have to say “close enough“ as the impact air temperature has on horsepower is only about 1% for every 10 degrees change. There is also always going to be slight pressure and humidity differences between tests, but I think this is as close as possible to scientific and certainly better than “well it feels faster!”

 

Best 6 runs “before intake”, only mod was the GM performance catback: Top 0-60 run was 5.71, average across the top 6 in this config was 5.76.

 

After intake, and about 150 miles learning by the time of testing...best was 5.46! And average across 6 runs was 5.57, almost 2 tenths quicker than “before”.

 

The 5.46 0-60 seemed like a freak of nature, I’ve never had it hook up and pull so hard from a stop. It was a legitimate run (not down hill, no funny business), but I couldn’t match it again and probably never will.

 

All testing was done in auto 4x4, just mashing the gas from a stop. Measured with a Dragy performance meter which has been proven to be very accurate. And as you can see, very consistent here in the records.

 

 

Taking a closer look at an “average“ run before (5.75s), and an “average“ run after (5.57s ran this exact time twice) probably gives the best picture of the real difference. I would say one could expect to consistently drop a tenth to 60, and two tenths not out of the question.

 

 

I had a lot of fun doing this test and didn’t really know what to expect. I would have been happy with anything but a loss, so the small improvement was just fine for me. Of course I’m left pounding my head on what could be if these things were tunable.

Awesome results! Thanks for sharing. 

[RyanbabZ71]

Had a helper not very photogenic





Only messed one thing up. Page 4 item #20 was extra at the end. A little of a PITA to install after the box is in [emoji35]


Ryan B.

[Bigfoot16]

On 10/16/2019 at 6:14 PM, RyanbabZ71 said:

Had a helper not very photogenic





Only messed one thing up. Page 4 item #20 was extra at the end. A little of a PITA to install after the box is in


Ryan B.

Curious to hear your review on this....

[Roto-fab]

On 10/16/2019 at 4:14 PM, RyanbabZ71 said:

Had a helper not very photogenic





Only messed one thing up. Page 4 item #20 was extra at the end. A little of a PITA to install after the box is in


Ryan B.

Ryan,

 

Looking forward to hearing your feedback on this system!

[Roto-fab]

Bump for new members!

[Ryan Kolkovich]

I have not seen an answer to why this CAI does not require an ECM refresh but the GM one does.  Can someone explain that?

[jwilso98]

Very curious what the members that have used this intake for a few months now think? Any feedback fellas?